Could this be us?

[panthers55]

Disagree, and here's why.

Let's say Marty Hurney isn't sold on the top guys (Newton or Gabbert) but he does still want a first round quarterback. If that were true, this deal would make perfect sense.

Again, I don't think it is us (Cardinals, Bills or Bengals more likely) and I actually hope it's not us (really don't want to see us give up another future first rounder) but again, other than the exact terms, there's logic to think it conceivably could be.

In his estimation he has who would be the third best Qb in this draft already on his staff in Clausen, He would only pick someone who was an upgrade and that is only Newton or Gabbert. No one else makes sense and frankly we haven't even had Dalton or Locker in for a visit have we???? I doubt we make the same mistake as last year which is to draft a Qb sight unseen like we did with Clausen.

And other than Newton or Gabbert there are no legitimate first rounders in this draft. Other guys like Locker will go in the first because so many teams have a need at quarterback, not because the class is so deep.

[Mr. Scot]

I don't think there is a QB after Newton and Gabbert that are worth two valuable picks.

There are a lot more very good DT's that will be available at the end of the 1st round than there will be good QBs there this year.

Austin was just an example. By the way, on a side note, Narwocki was pretty out of touch with the Austin situation as well. He clearly has no idea what went on with Austin judging from his analysis in PFW.

Not that he doesn't have some character concerns :)

Mayock pretty well echoed what Nawrocki said about Austin.

As to the QBs, I don't think there's anyone worth trading back into the first for either, but then I really don't think there's a QB worth taking in the first.

But what does Hurney think? That's the question.

That whole line of thinking has Bills FO written all over it. They have done that so many times. Not attacking you Scot just the thought process.

The Bills are one of my prime suspects - with Ponder being the target - but the Cards and Locker are at the top of that list.

[panthers55]

If we trade down 5-10 spots and pick up a 2nd round pick and a future #1, I could see the team still taking a QB with the 1st round pick...just wouldn't be cameron

If Newton and Gabbert aren't there it won't be anybody. Other than Mallett, what other Qb have we worked out besides Newton and Gabbert??

[Mr. Scot]

In his estimation he has who would be the third best Qb in this draft already on his staff in Clausen, He would only pick someone who was an upgrade and that is only Newton or Gabbert. No one else makes sense and frankly we haven't even had Dalton or Locker in for a visit have we???? I doubt we make the same mistake as last year which is to draft a Qb sight unseen like we did with Clausen.

And other than Newton or Gabbert there are no legitimate first rounders in this draft. Other guys like Locker will go in the first because so many teams have a need at quarterback, not because the class is so deep.

Given that Clausen would be rated above all quarterbacks but Newton and Gabbert, there is no way we pick up a later round guy or even a Locker or Dalton by trading up into the first and passing on Newton or Gabbert initially. This scenario is only being passed around by folks not wanting a Qb with the first. If we keep the pick it will be Newton. The only way we don't draft him is if we trade down a few picks to pick up someone else and get back our second.

The problem with all of that is that we don't know how Hurney has these guys rated.

Like I said, if he has ultimately decided that the top QBs are just too big a risk at number one, but a guy like Locker, Dalton or Ponder is an acceptable rick later in the round, then this could have Hurney written all over it.

Again, assuming King whiffed on the terms (which I admit is a bit of a stretch, but is possible).

[panthers55]

the ONLY way I see us taking a QB anywhere but #1 is if one of the top guys (maybe Mallett) slips all the way to the top of the third and we went defense at #1 and there isn't a D guy they think is as valuable there as Mallett.

Or we may pick up a guy in later rounds to replace Pike if the Panthers aren't sold on him, but I think that's unlikely...

I think you are right.If we pick a QB besides Newton or Gabbert it won't be to find an upgrade to Clausen but a replacement for Pike. At this point they are still set on finding a franchise guy in the draft.

[Mr. Scot]

the ONLY way I see us taking a QB anywhere but #1 is if one of the top guys (maybe Mallett) slips all the way to the top of the third and we went defense at #1 and there isn't a D guy they think is as valuable there as Mallett.

Or we may pick up a guy in later rounds to replace Pike if the Panthers aren't sold on him, but I think that's unlikely...

Reasonable.

I've given my chief suspects for who I think it actually is...

- Cardinals : Jake Locker

- Bills: Christian Ponder

- Bengals: Andy Dalton

Who have you got in your sights on this one? Am I missing anybody?

[panthers55]

The problem with all of that is that we don't know how Hurney has these guys rated.

Like I said, if he has ultimately decided that the top QBs are just too big a risk at number one, but a guy like Locker, Dalton or Ponder is an acceptable rick later in the round, then this could have Hurney written all over it.

Again, assuming King whiffed on the terms (which I admit is a bit of a stretch, but is possible).

If that were the case then they would trade down several picks, take the QB later in the first round and pick up a few extra picks. We would surely not pick at 1 and then trade up again and lose more picks next year. That makes no sense.

Plus I don't see dareus or Peterson being worth 50 million guaranteed. If we stay at 1 because we can't trade out, there is no scenario where taking anyone outside of a QB make any kind of financial sense.

I subscribe to the theory which TB had when they took Freeman, which is that if you would take a Qb with your first pick at 17, then you should take them at 1. If they aren't worth taking at 1, they are not a steal at 17. They are still a first rounder and if they are a bust, they set you back just as far and are as big a problem.

[mav1234]

Reasonable.

I've given my chief suspects for who I think it actually is...

- Cardinals : Jake Locker

- Bills: Christian Ponder

- Bengals: Andy Dalton

Who have you got in your sights on this one?

I think it depends quite a bit - I actually think Minnesota, Tennessee or Washington are the most likely. The reason for this is because if the quarterbacks fall down to NE, there's a decent chance that they would fall to the Bills, Cardinals, or Bengals (at least one of which almost certainly will have taken a QB at the top of the first, if not two of them). At the same time, there's enough teams separating Minny, Tenn and Washington that they might not want to risk letting "their guy" fall into that gambit of QB-hungry teams at the top of the 2nd.

On the other hand, what if both QBs fall to the bottom of the top 10? Then that changes EVERYTHING, and then I think you could see the Cardinals or the Bengals try to move way up past the Bills to ****** who they want.

[Bj-Monster23]

Thats the key I dont think the Panthers think Clausen is the franchise guy or a franchise QB, just been honest. And like Mr. scot and some others said on this board it might be the Bills bengals or another team. I hope Carolina doesnt make a bad trade. But right now I think Cam Newton might be the pick at number 1. Also just thinking if we can start free agency before the draft could anybody see Smitty gone and traded for a second round pick. I feel its little risk taking Austin in the second round. But I wouldnt mind the Notre Dame TE or and OG like Cannon to protect newton if we were to draft him.

[Bj-Monster23]

If that were the case then they would trade down several picks, take the QB later in the first round and pick up a few extra picks. We would surely not trade up again and lose more picks next year. That makes no sense.

Plus I don't see dareus or Peterson being worth 50 million guaranteed. If we stay at 1 because we can't trade out, there is no scenario where taking anyone outside of a QB make any kind of financial sense.

I subscribe to the theory whichTB had when they took Freeman, which is that if you would a Qb with your first pick at 17, then you should take them at 1. If they aren't worth taking at 1, they are not a steal at 17. They are still a first rounder and if they are a bust, they set you back just as far and are as big a problem.

I agree with you 110%...

[Mr. Scot]

I think it depends quite a bit - I actually think Minnesota, Tennessee or Washington are the most likely. The reason for this is because if the quarterbacks fall down to NE, there's a decent chance that they would fall to the Bills, Cardinals, or Bengals (at least one of which almost certainly will have taken a QB at the top of the first, if not two of them). At the same time, there's enough teams separating Minny, Tenn and Washington that they might not want to risk letting "their guy" fall into that gambit of QB-hungry teams at the top of the 2nd.

On the other hand, what if both QBs fall to the bottom of the top 10? Then that changes EVERYTHING, and then I think you could see the Cardinals or the Bengals try to move way up past the Bills to ****** who they want.

I agree with the additions to the list of possible suspects.

If King is right about New England and it's the Bills, it'd be an intradivisional trade (uncommon) but again, that was purely his speculation.

One of the reasons I see the Cardinals here is that Whisenhunt's been talking like a guy trying to prep his fanbase for the idea that they won't take a QB at #5.

[KillerKat]

can't trade future picks

[ammofan]

Honestly, as much as I want Cam Newton.....I would rather have Dareus/PP7 and Locker or Mallet!

[Highlandfire]

And if it is, what would you say about it?

From Peter King: Ten Thoughts on the Draft

Keep in mind, the team on the receiving end of the deal being the Patriots is purely King's speculation.

My own speculation is that if this were us, it could mean we're taking someone like Dareus, Green or Peterson first and then trading back into round one to take one of the lower rated QBs like Dalton, Locker or possibly even (shudder) Mallett.

This thoroughly fits Hurney's MO. Anyone who remembers the draft that netted Stewart and Otah knows that.

NOTE: If King has the terms correct, it couldn't be us because we don't have a second round pick this year, but I'm allowing for the possibility he doesn't have the exact terms. lf it actually involves a third rounder this year - or something else - then it indeed could be the Panthers.

I am guessing it is Buffalo. They will trade back in for a QB they want if he is there.